Holyjoe wrote:Not just the citizen clubs who are tightening the pursestrings... apparently two years ago Seongnam spent in the region of 250ì–µì› ($21m) running the team, last year the figure was 150ì–µì› ($12.5m) and this year they're aiming for just 80ì–µì› ($6.7m), with Shin Tae-yong having been told to place a much bigger emphasis on bringing through young players as the blank cheques that Kim Hak-bum was allowed to sign for transfers and contracts are now a thing of the past. Molina and Radoncic must be on rather fat contracts at the club, might not be long until we see them sold off or heading elsewhere

If this is true, and it very well could be, I'm at a lose to explain Seongnam's marketing department. Maybe it would be a good idea for the "church" to get rid of the team. Who's buy it? I don't know.

AnAmericanShallow men believe in luck. Strong men believe in cause and effect. - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Holyjoe wrote:Not just the citizen clubs who are tightening the pursestrings... apparently two years ago Seongnam spent in the region of 250ì–µì› ($21m) running the team, last year the figure was 150ì–µì› ($12.5m) and this year they're aiming for just 80ì–µì› ($6.7m), with Shin Tae-yong having been told to place a much bigger emphasis on bringing through young players as the blank cheques that Kim Hak-bum was allowed to sign for transfers and contracts are now a thing of the past. Molina and Radoncic must be on rather fat contracts at the club, might not be long until we see them sold off or heading elsewhere

If this is true, and it very well could be, I'm at a lose to explain Seongnam's marketing department. Maybe it would be a good idea for the "church" to get rid of the team. Who's buy it? I don't know.

Incheon United have signed a four year shirt sponsorship deal with Shinhan Bank worth 64ì–µì› which, whilst the money will come in quite handy, works out considerably less than what Shinhan have paid for club sponsorship in the past. Shinhan were paying 23ì–µì› a season to sponsor the side in 2009 and 2010 whilst the new deal works out at 16ì–µì› per year.

There are reports that Gangwon are experiencing some financial difficulties and they've been unable to pay their players in September. It seems that when new CEO Nam Jong-hyun was appointed last September (he was spotted dancing around like mad on the pitch having just been appointed) he made all sorts of promises about bringing in ridiculous levels of funding and sponsorship, including something like 100ì–µì› from Gangwon Land that he was involved with, but he's only managed to bring in 42ì–µì› and this has led to a serious budgeting shortfall. Nam has now tendered his resignation.

We've had reports of Incheon and Gyeongnam struggling to pay players this season and now Gangwon appear to be in financial trouble. Gyeongnam are doomed to spending another year in the top flight but perhaps relegation may well alleviate some of these problems for Gangwon?

Holyjoe wrote:There are reports that Gangwon are experiencing some financial difficulties and they've been unable to pay their players in September. It seems that when new CEO Nam Jong-hyun was appointed last September (he was spotted dancing around like mad on the pitch having just been appointed) he made all sorts of promises about bringing in ridiculous levels of funding and sponsorship, including something like 100ì–µì› from Gangwon Land that he was involved with, but he's only managed to bring in 42ì–µì› and this has led to a serious budgeting shortfall. Nam has now tendered his resignation.

We've had reports of Incheon and Gyeongnam struggling to pay players this season and now Gangwon appear to be in financial trouble. Gyeongnam are doomed to spending another year in the top flight but perhaps relegation may well alleviate some of these problems for Gangwon?

How so? K2 is professional, and I'm assuming Korean contracts are somewhat guaranteed (unlike in China). Wouldn't the revenue losses just bury them even deeper?

SaintsCanada wrote:How so? K2 is professional, and I'm assuming Korean contracts are somewhat guaranteed (unlike in China). Wouldn't the revenue losses just bury them even deeper?

I was going on the assumption that as they had quite a large amount of squad turnover in the winter then they will surely (!) have planned ahead for possible relegation by negotiating wage decreases in these new contracts which would help significantly were they to drop down a division. If not then they're pretty much fucked and it would be their own fault. They have a squad of 48 as well according to the K-League site so they can easily trim that come the end of the season regardless of which division they're in. I also reckon that a number of the better players would quite readily accept trades away from the club to existing K-League sides if they were to be relegated, folk like Kim Eun-jung and Han Dong-won must be on decent wages and there's a fairly decent chance of them moving to other K-League clubs in exchange for a youngster or two.

SaintsCanada wrote:How so? K2 is professional, and I'm assuming Korean contracts are somewhat guaranteed (unlike in China). Wouldn't the revenue losses just bury them even deeper?

I was going on the assumption that as they had quite a large amount of squad turnover in the winter then they will surely (!) have planned ahead for possible relegation by negotiating wage decreases in these new contracts which would help significantly were they to drop down a division. If not then they're pretty much fucked and it would be their own fault. They have a squad of 48 as well according to the K-League site so they can easily trim that come the end of the season regardless of which division they're in. I also reckon that a number of the better players would quite readily accept trades away from the club to existing K-League sides if they were to be relegated, folk like Kim Eun-jung and Han Dong-won must be on decent wages and there's a fairly decent chance of them moving to other K-League clubs in exchange for a youngster or two.

I guess. It's hard to imagine, though, that relegation would actually be financially beneficial. I mean, there's no rule that they need 48 players or decent salaries even in the K-League.

Imagine any company hoping for a big cut in revenue to save them, financially. While possible if you really stretch your imagination, it would require a very special situation!

How to internal K-League trades work, anyways? North American style (players take their current contract with them to the new club), or European-style (have to negotiate a new deal with the new employers)?

The squads in Korean football are absurd anyway. Why on earth would Gangwon have/need 38 players FFS. Suwon have 38 as well. And these players are in their mid 20s, it's not like they are 16/17/18 year olds. Madness

Pikey wrote:The squads in Korean football are absurd anyway. Why on earth would Gangwon have/need 38 players FFS. Suwon have 38 as well. And these players are in their mid 20s, it's not like they are 16/17/18 year olds. Madness

I reckon 38 is around the right number if you field a regular reserve team. Figure in each league game you use 11-14 players, and then you need about 18 more to fill a reserve match-squad, plus you have to factor in a handful of injuries or suspensions.

Then the next question would be; does a team need a reserve squad? They should have one for sure, but if cuts do need to be made it is somewhere to look. For Gangwon they could look to making a stronger bond with Gangleung City and effectively make their N-League side their reserve squad, this could work for a number of teams actually.

The K-League plans to disclose playersâ€™ annual salaries may not come into effect next season as it has run into opposition from some clubs.

â€œThe K-League insists that the overall personnel expenses will be reduced if the playersâ€™ annual salaries are revealed. But we believe the result is most likely to be the opposite,â€ said Choi Won-chang, public relations director of the Suwon Samsung Bluewings. â€œAs the new system will allow players to compare their salaries with one another, the clubs probably will have to pay more to keep hold of the leagueâ€™s top talent.â€

At a board of directorsâ€™ meeting on Sept. 11, the K-League announced its decision to disclose playersâ€™ salaries for transparent fiscal operations and argued the fans have the right to know. However, the plan has met opposition from some sides including the Bluewings and Jeonbuk Hyundai Motors who question its financial benefits. With the laws protecting the clubsâ€™ privacy and their right to make their own decisions on the matter, the proposal will not move forward without unanimous consent from the teams.

â€œAside from a few countries such as the U.S. and Australia, most clubs in Europe and Asia do not reveal playersâ€™ salaries with concerns it might lead their league to become stagnant because of a talent drain,â€ Choi said. â€œIt is like showing your cards at the table, while others keep them hidden, which will be very disadvantageous when domestic teams make deals with their counterparts overseas.â€

As a result, domestic clubs will be more likely lose their top players abroad, as the Korean clubs would not be able to access the salary information in other leagues when negotiating transfers, Choi said.

On the other hand, the K-League said the change is necessary for the domestic leagueâ€™s long-term success and financial stability, noting the clubs would be able to map out their financial plans more conveniently than now following the disclosure of the playersâ€™ salaries.

â€œIt will encourage the players to be more competitive in the market. It will also make it clearer for teams to single out who is responsible for important decisions regarding the recruitment of players,â€ K-League Public Relations General Manager Park Yong-chul said.

Teams in the European leagues do not reveal playersâ€™ salaries but they have the UEFA Financial Fair Play Regulations that prevent the clubs spending more than they make, designed to protect them from falling into financial difficulties. Teams opposing the K-League idea want to adopt the Fair Play system instead.

â€œWe believe that all the clubs agree on the need for improvements. With that in mind, we are going to keep trying to make the plan work through more research and discussion,â€ Park said.

Evergreen wrote:Daejeon made a profit in the third quarter of 2012 of....wait for it......

43 Won.

That's pretty incredible -- if actually true. Of course, that's what the aim should be, really, breaking even. Profit would be good if there are useful things to invest in, but if the stadium, training facilities and academy are in good shape, any surplus revenue should be spent on wages and/or transfer fees (which are somewhat rare in the K-League).